Principles for applying optogenetic tools derived from direct comparative analysis of microbial opsins

By J. Mattis, K. Tye, Emily Ferenczi, Charu Ramakrishnan, D. O’Shea, R. Prakash, Lisa A. Gunaydin, Minsuk Hyun, Lief Ericsson Fenno, Viviana Gradinaru and 2 more. Nature Methods, 2011

757 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Diverse optogenetic tools have allowed versatile control over neural activity. Many depolarizing and hyperpolarizing tools have now been developed in multiple laboratories and tested across different preparations, presenting opportunities but also making it difficult to draw direct comparisons. This challenge has been compounded by the dependence of performance on parameters such as vector, promoter, expression time, illumination, cell type and many other variables. As a result, it has become increasingly complicated for end users to select the optimal reagents for their experimental needs. For a rapidly growing field, critical figures of merit should be formalized both to establish a framework for further development and so that end users can readily understand how these standardized parameters translate into performance. Here we systematically compared microbial opsins under matched experimental conditions to extract essential principles and identify key parameters for the conduct, design and interpretation of experiments involving optogenetic techniques.

Subfields: Biomedical Engineering, Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Plant Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/032a9b37935643f5eee2bd82217e57e9cb23e1c2

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Biomedical Engineering

A. Cohen

In Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

In Plant Science

S. Tonegawa

Citations in the corpus

Closed-loop and activity-guided optogenetic control. (2015, neutral): “First, an engineered hyperpolarizing ion pump (Mattis et al., 2012) has been shown to be effective for single-cell resolution two-photon inhibition in scattering mammalian brain tissue (Prakash et al., 2012), but light-driven chloride and proton pumps from archaeal halobacteria conduct only a…”
Synaptic and Behavioral Profile of Multiple Glutamatergic Inputs to the Nucleus Accumbens (2012, positive): “To compare the functional strength and synaptic properties of each of these afferent pathways, we employed an optogenetic approach and targeted channelrhodopsin-2 (ChR2) expression to projection neurons in these areas (Mattis et al., 2012).”
Physiological properties and behavioral correlates of hippocampal granule cells and mossy cells (2017, neutral): “To obtain expression of channelrhodopsin-2 (ChR2; Boyden et al., 2005) or archaerhodopsin-3 (Arch; Chow et al., 2010; Mattis et al., 2011), SST-Cremice were injected with either AAV5-EF1a-DIO-hChR2(H234R)EYFP-WPRE-pA (n = 6 mice) or AAV5-EF1a-DIO-eArch3.”
Entorhinal–hippocampal neuronal circuits bridge temporally discontiguous events (2015, background): “This is reinforced by the data showing that ArchT-mediated inactivation of the Island cells axons enhanced trace fear conditioning learning.”
All-optical electrophysiology in mammalian neurons using engineered microbial rhodopsins (2014, methodology): “24).”